Federal Election Integrity Act Of 2006

FEDERAL ELECTION INTEGRITY ACT OF 2006 -- (House of Representatives - September 20, 2006)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 4484, the Federal Election Integrity Act of 2006, because it will sacrifice the most fundamental right guaranteed to all American citizens by the Constitution--the right to vote. Contrary to its title, the bill will undermine the integrity of our electoral process by imposing unnecessary barriers to full participation in federal elections. The bill's requirements of proof of citizenship and photo identification as a prerequisite to voting may appear innocuous, but in reality they will create an unprecedented regime of disenfranchisement aimed at seniors, minority voters, low income voters, students and voters with disabilities.

Mr. Speaker, this bill imposes an undue burden on eligible voters. As the United States District Court found last year in Common Cause v. Billups, 406 F.Supp.2d 1326 (N.D. Ga. 2005), when considering a Georgia law requiring ID at the polls, ``photo identification requirements unconstitutionally burden the fundamental right to vote of eligible American citizens.'' The district judge issued an immediate injunction against the law, likening it to a segregation-era poll tax because the digital picture ID would cost voters $20. The court found that these provisions disproportionately affect traditionally disenfranchised voters, including senior citizens, minority voters, poor voters, disabled voters and young voters.

And the decisions keep coming. A state judge yesterday again rejected the Georgia law requiring voters to show government-issued photo identification, writing in his decision, ``This cannot be.'' In his ruling, the judge said that the law places too much of a burden on voters, and ``Any attempt by the legislature to require more than what is required by the express language of our Constitution cannot withstand judicial scrutiny''. Lake v. Perdue, No. CV 119207 (Ga. Super. Ct. Sept. 19, 2006) In Michigan, the photo ID requirement was declared unconstitutional by the State's attorney general and his decision is now being reviewed by the State Supreme Court. In Pennsylvania, a similar voter ID bill was vetoed by the governor.

Proponents of this bill claim that these draconian constraints are necessary to guard against identity fraud at the Nation's polling places. The truth, however tells a far different story. According to the United States Department of Justice, out of 196,139,871 votes cast since 2002, only about 80 voters were convicted of federal election fraud. Mr. Speaker, when we compare the number of eligible voters that will be disenfranchised because of this bill to the number of documented cases of fraud, it's clear that this bill will do more harm than good--the cure is clearly worse than the disease.

Mr. Speaker, it's hard to believe that the same Congress that reauthorized the Voting Rights Act two months ago could now seriously contemplate passage of this bill. There is plenty that needs to be done to fix our electoral system, but instead of addressing problems that don't exist, it is our responsibility to ensure that we have a model system of choosing our elected officials--one that exemplifies the true principle of democracy and serves as an example to other nations around the world. I urge my colleagues to oppose this bill.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

http://thomas.loc.gov/